BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Subject: [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:55:32 -0500
- In-reply-to: <20171122184451.84EEF14312C@localhost>
- References: <23060.21501.663030.241910@blazemonger.com> <108a6c7e-e678-6cba-85b1-d20765cc03f8@gmail.com> <D63B28DE.69A65%joe@polcari.com> <20171122184451.84EEF14312C@localhost>
On 11/22/2017 1:44 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote: > And voices do change, both short and long term. What happens with > voice ID when you have a respiratory infection, blocked sinuses, what > have you? Which is why any voice authentication system needs some leeway in matching attempts with the baseline. And of course it needs to adapt to individuals' vocal changes over time. Voices can be recorded but this isn't necessarily good enough. Then again, POTS is restricted to 300Hz to 3kHz, and any system intended to operate in this range is going to have problems. But this isn't a problem intrinsic to voice authentication in principle; it's a flaw in these specific instances. Then again, again, the number of potential users limited by POTS restrictions is dwindling. Do you use any kind of voice over digital network like LTE or digital cable or FTTP or WiFi calling? Do you use standalone VoIP or chat applications? If so then you're getting 50Hz to 7kHz or better which is more than enough to capture low and high frequency harmonics needed for accurate voice authentication. It is possible to detect recordings being played back. For example, recordings made outside of controlled studio environments contain noise which won't match ambient noise during playback. Matching noise could be used to detect attempts to spoof the system. An audio engineer or forensics expert (I'm neither) could tell you other ways to detect recordings. Not suggesting that any of them are easy or that any of them can be done in real time, just that it is possible. So yeah. Voice authentication can work and it can be substantially more secure than passwords (I'm giving passwords the benefit of the doubt as to their security). In principle. Hearing it in practice still, unfortunately, remains to be heard. -- Rich P.
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: rlk at alum.mit.edu (Robert Krawitz)
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- References:
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: dbarrett at blazemonger.com (Daniel Barrett)
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: joe at polcari.com (Joe Polcari)
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: rlk at alum.mit.edu (Robert Krawitz)
- [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Next by Date: [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Next by thread: [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Index(es):